MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946770475 · doi:10.3390/f10050447

Impact of Shortened Winter Road Access on Costs of Forest Operations

2019· article· en· W2946770475 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tevfik Z. Kuloglu, Victor J. Lieffers, A. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicForest Biomass Utilization and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoggingTruckEnvironmental scienceYardSalvage loggingMillHydrology (agriculture)ForestryMeteorologyEngineeringGeographyAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant portion of the forest harvesting in the cooler regions of North America occurs in the winter when the ground is frozen and can support machine traffic. Climate change may influence the cost of forestry operations by reducing the period of winter access in those cold regions. In this study, we examined the impact of a shortened period of frozen ground conditions on logging operation and costs. To adapt to shorter period of frozen soil conditions, logging contractors might need to provide more machines and labor to complete logging in a shorter period of frozen conditions. The objectives were to calculate the costs of logging operations of a hypothetical forestry company in Alberta, Canada under two conditions: first, when the wood was hauled to the mill directly; and second, when part of the wood was hauled to satellite yards close to the logging area, thereby minimizing the annual number of idle hauling trucks. General Circulation Models were used to predict future winter weather conditions. Using the current type of harvesting machines and hauling directly to the mill, the unit cost of logging operations ($/m3) was projected to increase by an average of 1.6% to 2.5% in 2030s, 2.8% to 5.3% in the 2050s and 4.8% to 10.9% in the 2080s compared to the base year of 2015–2016. With use of satellite yards during the winter logging, the total logging cost will increase over direct haul, by 1.8% to 2.8% in the 2030s, 3.1% to 5.7% in the 2050s and 5.2% to 11.4% in the 2080s. Using satellite yards, however, will provide year-around employment for hauling truckers and more consistent and reliable hauling operations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicForest Biomass Utilization and ManagementFrench-language works237,207